Lendl (adding Wimbledon) would be a 9-time Slam champ with a career Grand Slam.

Borg (US Open) would be a 12-time Slam champ with wins on all surfaces

Mac (French Open) would be an 8-time Slam champ with wins on all surfaces.

Edberg (French Open) would be a 7-time Slam champ with a career Grand Slam. I added Edberg and took away Becker since Edberg was actually in a French Open final.

Courier (Wimbledon) would be a 5-time Slam champ with wins on all surfaces.

Not sure if these players should be on the list, since they never made the final in a "missing piece." But, anyway:

Jimmy Connors (French Open) would be a 9-time Slam champ with a career Grand Slam.

Becker (French Open) would be a 7-time Slam champ with a career Grand Slam.

Wilander (Wimbledon) would be an 8-time Slam champ with a career Grand Slam.

Not sure if you're asking what would happen if ALL of these things happened, or if we're going down the list and asking what would happen to this ONE player's legacy if he was the only one on the list to add a Slam.

If they ALL have the added Slam, not much changes in relative terms since they're all filling in missing pieces (some to achieve career Grand Slams, some to get 3 of the 4 and wins on all surfaces.)

If just one player has the added Slam, I'm not sure. I think Lendl's legacy would benefit the most. For some reason, maybe unfairly, that missing Wimbledon is seen as a more glaring omission for Lendl than the missing Slams are from the other players.

Lendl (adding Wimbledon) would be a 9-time Slam champ with a career Grand Slam.

Borg (US Open) would be a 12-time Slam champ with wins on all surfaces

Mac (French Open) would be an 8-time Slam champ with wins on all surfaces.

Edberg (French Open) would be a 7-time Slam champ with a career Grand Slam. I added Edberg and took away Becker since Edberg was actually in a French Open final.

Courier (Wimbledon) would be a 5-time Slam champ with wins on all surfaces.

Not sure if these players should be on the list, since they never made the final in a "missing piece." But, anyway:

Jimmy Connors (French Open) would be a 9-time Slam champ with a career Grand Slam.

Becker (French Open) would be a 7-time Slam champ with a career Grand Slam.

Wilander (Wimbledon) would be an 8-time Slam champ with a career Grand Slam.

Not sure if you're asking what would happen if ALL of these things happened, or if we're going down the list and asking what would happen to this ONE player's legacy if he was the only one on the list to add a Slam.

If they ALL have the added Slam, not much changes in relative terms since they're all filling in missing pieces (some to achieve career Grand Slams, some to get 3 of the 4 and wins on all surfaces.)

If just one player has the added Slam, I'm not sure. I think Lendl's legacy would benefit the most. For some reason, maybe unfairly, that missing Wimbledon is seen as a more glaring omission for Lendl than the missing Slams are from the other players.

Lendl (adding Wimbledon) would be a 9-time Slam champ with a career Grand Slam.

Borg (US Open) would be a 12-time Slam champ with wins on all surfaces

Mac (French Open) would be an 8-time Slam champ with wins on all surfaces.

Edberg (French Open) would be a 7-time Slam champ with a career Grand Slam. I added Edberg and took away Becker since Edberg was actually in a French Open final.

Courier (Wimbledon) would be a 5-time Slam champ with wins on all surfaces.

Not sure if these players should be on the list, since they never made the final in a "missing piece." But, anyway:

Jimmy Connors (French Open) would be a 9-time Slam champ with a career Grand Slam.

Becker (French Open) would be a 7-time Slam champ with a career Grand Slam.

Wilander (Wimbledon) would be an 8-time Slam champ with a career Grand Slam.

Not sure if you're asking what would happen if ALL of these things happened, or if we're going down the list and asking what would happen to this ONE player's legacy if he was the only one on the list to add a Slam.

If they ALL have the added Slam, not much changes in relative terms since they're all filling in missing pieces (some to achieve career Grand Slams, some to get 3 of the 4 and wins on all surfaces.)

If just one player has the added Slam, I'm not sure. I think Lendl's legacy would benefit the most. For some reason, maybe unfairly, that missing Wimbledon is seen as a more glaring omission for Lendl than the missing Slams are from the other players.

If just one player has the added Slam, I'm not sure. I think Lendl's legacy would benefit the most. For some reason, maybe unfairly, that missing Wimbledon is seen as a more glaring omission for Lendl than the missing Slams are from the other players.

Click to expand...

I think the fact that Lendl himself placed so much emphasis on winning Wimby has a lot to do with this.

How would the legacy be if Lendl had won wimbledon, johny mac won french open, courier winning wim, borg winning a us open, becker winning a french open, etc

whose legacy would of changed the most?

Click to expand...

I would say Lendl because he would earn a Career Slam which is not far behind Laver's 1969 GS. McEnroe win the FO in 1984 would earn him 3 out 4 slam that year, best win/loss record, and arguably ranked #1 greatest season of all time.

Not for me. I mean, I like him very much but I've some troubles to empathize with him. On the contrary, when I watch Lendl, I'm there suffering

Click to expand...

Certo.Lendl is one of the players I have witnessed most.I´ve undergone any kind of emotional experience with him: like,admire,hate,respect,disrespect,ignore...a true emotional learning.same for Connors,Mac,Nastase and a few more ( Borg, I never loved him but I just admired him, he had such an aurea that you don´t see anymore)

Most of the players back then had their one tournament they could not win. Nowadays, we have to go to the Davis Cup, WTF, or the Olympics to find something they haven't won. Interesting the way it all changes.

Most of the players back then had their one tournament they could not win. Nowadays, we have to go to the Davis Cup, WTF, or the Olympics to find something they haven't won. Interesting the way it all changes.

Click to expand...

This is not because todays players are better but rather because of surface homogenization. For instance, Wimbledon going from being a fast court event to a medium paced court event

Lendl (adding Wimbledon) would be a 9-time Slam champ with a career Grand Slam.

Borg (US Open) would be a 12-time Slam champ with wins on all surfaces

Mac (French Open) would be an 8-time Slam champ with wins on all surfaces.

Edberg (French Open) would be a 7-time Slam champ with a career Grand Slam. I added Edberg and took away Becker since Edberg was actually in a French Open final.

Courier (Wimbledon) would be a 5-time Slam champ with wins on all surfaces.

Not sure if these players should be on the list, since they never made the final in a "missing piece." But, anyway:

Jimmy Connors (French Open) would be a 9-time Slam champ with a career Grand Slam.

Becker (French Open) would be a 7-time Slam champ with a career Grand Slam.

Wilander (Wimbledon) would be an 8-time Slam champ with a career Grand Slam.

Not sure if you're asking what would happen if ALL of these things happened, or if we're going down the list and asking what would happen to this ONE player's legacy if he was the only one on the list to add a Slam.

If they ALL have the added Slam, not much changes in relative terms since they're all filling in missing pieces (some to achieve career Grand Slams, some to get 3 of the 4 and wins on all surfaces.)

If just one player has the added Slam, I'm not sure. I think Lendl's legacy would benefit the most. For some reason, maybe unfairly, that missing Wimbledon is seen as a more glaring omission for Lendl than the missing Slams are from the other players.

Click to expand...

Would this change our valuation of the career Grand Slam, because it would have been much more routine?